This web site provides information on how to use XBRL to help business users exchange business information. Business information incluldes both financial and nonfinancial information. Everything on this site made available to all under a Creative Commons License. Everything may be reused however one sees fit. All we ask is that you give credit where credit is due. If you have any questions, comments, concerns, suggestions, ideas or other feedback, please contact charles.hoffman@me.com.

The author of this web site assumes all responsibility for this web site and it's content. The views expressed on this web site are the views of the author and may not represent the views of his employer.

Exchange gains (losses) part of net cash flow or does not report line item (6,845)

Exchange gains (losses) part of cash roll forward (98)

Entities use different income statement formats

Single step income statement (4,255)

Multi step income statement (2,688)

Entities report Income (loss) from equity method investments in different locations on their income statement

Income (loss) from equity method investments not reported (5,290)

Income (loss) from equity method investments reported BEFORE tax (1,402)

Income (loss) from equity method investments reported AFTER tax (113)

Income (loss) from equity method investments reported within nonoperating income (loss) (122)

Income (loss) from equity method investments reported within revenues (16)

Income (loss) from equity method investments reported between income (loss) from continuing operations before and after taxes (0, not working yet)

Some entities report operating income (loss) as a line item while others don't

Operating income (loss) reported (5,120)

Operating income (loss) not reported (1,823)

These may not be totally correct yet...but they will be eventually. Probably soon. The amazing thing is that when I switched from the single set to the multi-set or what I call a report frame based approach, I did not break anything as far as I can tell. This is how the data sorts out now by generator:

(Click image for larger view)

So, the last results I provides showed that 63.1% of entities passed all conformance tests, that dropped to 60.0%. I don't think that is because quality is going backwards, it is because my testing is getting better based on feedback I am receiving.

There is another thing that I want to point out. The total number of nonconforming items is 4,516. I would break that down as follows:

Most issues can be proven to be filer error, 67.9% approximately. 290 or so appear to be cause by missing US GAAP XBRL Taxonomy concepts. And the remaining 1,159 are likely caused by bugs or errors that I still have in my process (in the mapping rules or in the impute rules, this is still a work in process). So basically the point is that why filers don't conform can be explained.

I also want to point out this to put things into perspective. If you look at the two graphics below you can see that while 4,516 nonconforming items exist you will also note that by one measure 349,781 conforming items exist and by another measure 141,371 conforming items exist:

So basically, somewhere between 96.9% and 98.7% of all fundamental accounting concept relations are conformed to and 60% of all reporting entities conform to 100% of these relations currently.

And there is one final graphic I want to show you. This is the summary of conforming/nonconforming items as shown from the commercial software product that I am using to evaluate public company financial statements against these fundamental accounting concept relations: